Note: San Diego now has a line again like the other cities, although flatter, and the warning at the top of Greg’s lab page has been edited to say “Update: Apologies for the delay. Current data has been restored.”

Greg’s lab provides real-time “California radiation monitoring map”. I just noticed an update with a warning at the top of the main page:

Update: Data for some locations is currently being withheld by the EPA for review. Fresh data for the locations in question will begin to appear once the data is re-cleared for public release.

The access to raw data in some locations is currently unavailable for those who want to monitor time-critical information for radiation. San Jose monitoring stops on March 24th. Here is a graph for San Diego, which stops on March 23rd.

The page has two notes, one of which gives the following prediction:

Please be aware that, while there is evidence that traces of fallout from the damaged Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant in Japan are arriving on U.S. shores, the contribution of these substances at the levels detected to your daily radiation dose is practically nil. The Department of Energy and the EPA continue to monitor the situation carefully, and there is no expectation that harmful amounts of fallout will reach the United States.

That being said, the line only runs for a few days and then stops on the same day that Japan’s nuclear catastrophe was put in a different light by European scientists monitoring data in California.

Austrian scientists have released what appears to be the first clear, independent data concerning radiation levels in the immediate aftermath of the Fukushima radiation leak.

By releasing data from two monitoring stations of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty Organization (CTBTO) from Japan and California, researchers from the Central Institute for Meteorology and Geodynamics in Vienna have calculated backwards to estimate the true levels of radiation from Fukushima.

[…]

…Gerhard Wotawa, the lead Austrian researcher, noted that because of the high volume of particles released only during the first four days of the leak, he speculated that further data would reveal an even higher total amount.

“The releases of the volatile radionucleotides, like iodine and cesium, are very likely in the same order of magnitude as happened during the Chernobyl accident,” he told Deutsche Welle, adding that CTBTO member states, like Austria, only received data 72 hours after it was gathered via e-mail and private websites.

Other scientists disagree with this prediction but not definitively. They all say there is a need to review more data. Meanwhile, Japan is reporting more serious leaks detected.

Earlier, officials from the plant’s operator said there was possible damage at reactor number three at the complex, meaning more radioactive contamination may have leaked into the environment.

“It is possible that the pressure vessel containing the fuel rods in the reactor is damaged,” a spokesman from Tokyo Electric Power Co (TEPCO) told the AFP news agency.

So why has the EPA withheld data after the scientists announce a need for more transparency? Are they trying to tune out noise or hide a weak signal to avoid more speculation about the direction it might be headed? Some are starting to use the graphs as a reason to be concerned. Maybe the EPA has found the graphs are too low and should show an increase — a warning? I have a feeling it’s not the latter.

I have to say this reminds me of a 2009 story about how the EPA handled data on arsenic, lead, mercury and boron pollution from coal power.

People who live near sites used to store ash or sludge from coal-fired power plants have a one in 50 chance of developing cancer, according to a just released government report kept from the public for seven years by the Bush Administration.

The data on harm was released after the 2008 Tennessee coal ash spill ignited greater public concern. Will the public demand real-time radiation monitoring be restored, or at least that the EPA better explain the reasons for withholding data?

Updated to add: Humorous view of data analysis from the Daily Show